Direction: In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between ''Strong'' arguments and ''Weak'' arguments insofar as they relate to the question. ''Strong'' arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. ''Weak'' arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question.
-
Statement:
Should the Government bring the prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO)?
Arguments:
I. No, POTO endangers several constitutionally and internationally accepted human rights standards.
II. Yes, terrorism has become a major threat and existing laws have proved insufficient to combat terrorism.
-
- if only argument I is strong
- if only argument II is strong
- if either I or II is strong
- if neither I nor II is strong; and
- if both I and II are strong
Correct Option: E
Both I and II are strong. Infringement of constitutionally and internationally accepted human rights standards can 't be ignored. Hence I is strong . Argument II is also strong because insufficiency of existing laws gives rise to the need to bring new laws.
